Suppress-Script candidates (was: Re: frr, fy, ngo, tt)

Doug Ewell dewell at
Wed Sep 27 17:54:10 CEST 2006

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

>> Lines where LTRU has no script and CLDR has one are not something we 
>> need to spend a great amount of time worrying about, unless there is 
>> a genuine concern that people are going to start writing, say, 
>> "ig-Latn-NG" and it won't match with "ig-NG".
> Unfortunately, it is *precisely* that concern that got 
> Suppress-Script: into RFC 4646 in the first place.  So that is what we 
> must get right. When people are confronted with a "Script" drop-down 
> menu, the instinct will be to choose the correct answer rather than 
> leaving it on default, so without adequate Suppress-Script: 
> information the result will indeed be "ig-Latn-NG".

My point in choosing Igbo was that it is a language spoken by a large 
number of people in one country (18 million in Nigeria) and virtually 
nowhere else, so it would be unlikely that "ig-NG" would communicate 
much more information than "ig" alone.

>> >lang mo  ltru Latn cldr Cyrl Latn
>> >lang ms  ltru Latn cldr Arab Latn
> Yes, I'd have to say we screwed up on those two.  Fortunately, 
> Moldovan is only a separate language for political reasons (it's 
> really Romanian, as even the Moldovan Academy of Science agrees), and 
> "ms-arab" is pretty thoroughly obsolete.

Unfortunately, we can't change them now.

Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list